IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hig/wpaper/56-law-2015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Decision-Making Process in Punishment Imposition: Four Factors of Public Perception in Russia

Author

Listed:
  • Zinaida M. Pogosova

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • M Nizhnik

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

  • Henry Penikas

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics)

Abstract

The “ignorance of law” defense is often used as an argument to decrease the degree of punishment assigned to a convicted criminal. Previous research has identified that the degree of punishment is, inter alia, impacted by the perceived morality of the action and the convicted criminal’s knowledge of the law. Compared to previous findings, the current paper contributes to the field of study in three principal ways. First, it analyzes Russian respondents and their perceptions of morality of action (previous studies have dealt with American respondents). Second, the present paper traces the distinction between lawyers’ perceptions and those of laypeople. Third, the quantitative impact of the ignorance of law defense on a trial group is traced by considering the interrelationship of factors determining the ultimate degree of punishment a hypothetical criminal would be sentenced to.

Suggested Citation

  • Zinaida M. Pogosova & M Nizhnik & Henry Penikas, 2015. "The Decision-Making Process in Punishment Imposition: Four Factors of Public Perception in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 56/LAW/2015, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:56/law/2015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hse.ru/data/2015/12/14/1134474672/56LAW2015.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Robinson, "undated". "Punishing Dangerousness: Cloaking Preventative Detention as Criminal Justice," Scholarship at Penn Law upenn_wps-1043, University of Pennsylvania Law School.
    2. Sunstein, Cass R, 2000. "Cognition and Cost-Benefit Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 1059-1103, June.
    3. Raslavičius, Laurencas & Kučinskas, Vytautas & Jasinskas, Algirdas, 2013. "The prospects of energy forestry and agro-residues in the Lithuania's domestic energy supply," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 419-431.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eric A. Posner & E. Glen Weyl, 2014. "Benefit-Cost Paradigms in Financial Regulation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 43(S2), pages 1-34.
    2. Jérôme Massiani, 2023. "Economic Expertise and Large Infrastructures Projects: The 2019 Cost Benefit Analysis of the Lyon Turin Project [Expertise économique et grandes infrastructures : l’analyse coûts- avantages du Lyon," Post-Print hal-04159527, HAL.
    3. Jolanta Bijańska & Krzysztof Wodarski & Aneta Aleksander, 2022. "Analysis of the Financing Options for Pro-Ecological Projects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-30, March.
    4. Antony Millner & Hélène Ollivier, 2016. "Beliefs, Politics, and Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 226-244.
    5. Treich, Nicolas, 2010. "The value of a statistical life under ambiguity aversion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 15-26, January.
    6. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    7. Petr Špecián, 2017. "Ekonomická analýza referenda [Economic Analysis of a Referendum]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2017(4), pages 460-475.
    8. Johanna Jussila Hammes, 2021. "The Impact of Career Concerns and Cognitive Dissonance on Bureaucrats’ Use of Benefit-Cost Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(2), pages 409-424, October.
    9. Lisa A. Robinson & James K. Hammitt, 2013. "Behavioral economics and the conduct of benefit–cost analysis: towards principles and standards," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 10, pages 317-363, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Marquez, Pablo, 2006. "Cost Benefit Analysis, Value Of A Statistical Life And Culture: Challenges For Risk Regulation," MPRA Paper 2632, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Feb 2007.
    11. Jussila Hammes , Johanna, 2017. "The impact of career concerns and cognitive dissonance on bureaucrats’ use of cost-benefit analysis," Working papers in Transport Economics 2017:5, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    12. Portuese, Aurelien, 2018. "Towards a Meta Cost-benefit Analysis: The Case of Brexit," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 19(1), June.
    13. Nicolai Foss, 2001. "Bounded Rationality in the Economics of Organization: Present Use and (Some) Future Possibilities," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 5(3), pages 401-425, September.
    14. Nerhagen, Lena, 2016. "Management by good intentions and best wishes: on sustainability, tourism and transport investment planning in Sweden," Working papers in Transport Economics 2016:4, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    15. Brennan, Timothy J., 2014. "Behavioral economics and policy evaluation," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 89-109, January.
    16. Lisa A. Robinson & James K. Hammitt, 2011. "Behavioral Economics and Regulatory Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(9), pages 1408-1422, September.
    17. Algirdas Jasinskas & Vytautas Kleiza & Dionizas Streikus & Rolandas Domeika & Edvardas Vaiciukevičius & Gvidas Gramauskas & Marvin T. Valentin, 2022. "Assessment of Quality Indicators of Pressed Biofuel Produced from Coarse Herbaceous Plants and Determination of the Influence of Moisture on the Properties of Pellets," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, January.
    18. Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2004. "What's it worth? An examination of historical trends and future directions in environmental valuation," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 419-443, September.
    19. Raslavičius, Laurencas & Striūgas, Nerijus & Felneris, Mantas, 2018. "New insights into algae factories of the future," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 643-654.
    20. Tasic Slavisa, 2011. "Are Regulators Rational?," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 17(1), pages 1-21, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    public opinion; policy-making; penal policy; punishment theory; just deserts; deterrence; consequentialism; utilitarianism; ignorance of law defense; morality perception; probit.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hig:wpaper:56/law/2015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Shamil Abdulaev or Shamil Abdulaev (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.